the chamber will recess between 12:30 and 2 eastern for weekend party lunches. the senate will start work on a bill expanding health care, job assistance, education benefits for veterans. the first procedural vote set for 3:15 eastern. live to the floor of the u.s. senate on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will be in order. today's opening prayer will be offered by our guest chaplain father patrick conroy, who is the chaplain of the u.s. house of representatives. father conroy. the guest chaplain: let us pray loving god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. on this day, help us to discover the power of resting in you, and receiving assurance and encouragement in your amazing grace. send your spirit down upon the members of this senate, who have been entrusted by their fellow-americans with the

awesome privilege and responsibility of sustaining the great experiment of democratic self-government. may they be reminded always of who they are. may they be open to your inspiration, that they might overcome the temptation to work through the issues of this day on their own strength and cleverness. grant them wisdom, insight, and vision, that the work they do will be for the betterment of our nation during a time of struggle for so many millions of americans. may they earn the trust and respect of those they represent, whether or not they had earned their vote, and make history that expands the great legacy of so many who have served in this chamber before now - a legacy of noble service, sometimes political risk, but always great leadership. may all that is done this day be

for your greater honor and glory. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. mr. reid: mr. president? the president pro tempore: the majority leader. mr. reid: -- -- [inaudible] the president pro tempore: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 1982, a bill to improve the provision of medical services and benefits to veterans and for other purposes.

mr. reid: mr. president, following my remarks and those of the republican leader, the senate will be in a period of morning business until 11:05 a.m. with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each, with the majority controlling the first half, republicans the final half. at 11:05 the senate will resume executive session to consider the nomination of james maxwell moody jr. to be a judge in the eastern district of arkansas. at 11:15 there will be five roll call votes in order to confirm a number of district court nominations. i ask consent there be two minutes equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: these are ten minutes votes after the first one and we're going to vote them off. if people are late, they are at their peril. we have a lot to do today and we have to move on. it is not fair for members to

wait. following the disposition of the nomination of beth freeman to be u.s. district judge of the southern district of california the senate will recess until 2:15 for weekly caucus meetings. i ask consent when the senate reconvenes there be an hour of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees prior to a cloture vote on thes motion to proceed to s. 1982, the veterans bill. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, today

the senate will vote to advance bipartisan legislation that expands and improves the health care and job training available to our nation's veterans. i thank the senator from vermont, bernard sanders, for his leadership on this issue and for his dedication to america's servicemen and women. the 19th century british statesman george canning said -- and i quote -- "when our perils are passed, shall our gratitude sleep? when our perils are past, shall our gratitude sleep?" it is clear the world is still a very perilous place the united states is winding down more than a decade of war in afghanistan and we're out of iraq. so, mr. president, our gratitude shall not sleep. it is time to demonstrate the depth and breadth of our appreciation to the men and women who have kept this country safe to the risk of their lives

and sacrifice of their families. i think of a young man, mr. president, from hawthorne, nevada, enlisted right out of high school; 18 years old, is in afghanistan for a matter of days and one of those explosive devices blows off his legs at the hips. i think of him and his parents, what a struggle. that's what this legislation is all about. this bill would not only improve veterans' access to health care, it would extend job training programs for service members reentering the civilian workforce. it would bolster benefits for surviving spouses and children and would make the veterans administration more transparent and more efficient. senator sanders' legislation would allow the veterans administration 27 new clinics and medical facilities in 18 states and puerto rico. these clinics will improve the quality of care and reduce

travel time for our retired heroes, particularly for veterans who live in rural areas, as the young man i just talked about is from a very rural part of nevada, hawthorne. this legislation would help the v.a. work to end the backlog for claims of benefits. legislation contained in this package will improve care benefits for veterans who experience sexual trauma while serving their country. this measure expands educational opportunities for recently separated veterans by securing in state tuition rates for post-9/11 veterans at all colleges and universities. this measure renews the vow to help hire heroes act which has helped spur hiring of out of work service members, has given more than 70,000 veterans access to job training. unfortunately, though, mr. president, unemployment is still far too high among veterans transitioning back to the civilian workforce. last year more than 700,000 men and women who served in the united states military were

unemployed. this is simply unacceptable. no one who has fought for their country overseas should have to fight for a job here at home. instead we should be helping veterans, especially those who have endured more than a decade of war, to continue to serve their country as productive citizens. that's why this legislation extends for two years a program that helps former service members get the skills they need to compete in a civilian workforce. this legislation has the support of virtually every veterans organization in this country, 25 of them, including the american legion, the veterans of foreign wars. and the bill is fully paid for with the savings from winding down the two wars in iraq and afghanistan that so strained our military and our financial resources for more than a decade. the pentagon projects that more spending will go down as we continue to release the number of american troops in afghanistan. this legislation will lock in those savings establishing caps and overseas war spending the

very first time. it is only fair we use a small portion of those savings to invest in our returning veterans who have given so much for the past 13 years to ensure our safety. even with the perils of the wars in iraq and afghanistan passed, for so many of our service members our gratitude shall not sleep. we owe it to our veterans to make the transition to peace a very productive time. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: late last week

the obama administration proposed yet another round of drastic cuts to a popular medicare program used by millions, millions of american seniors. not surprisingly, they did it quietly in the hopes that these latest cuts to medicare advantage would somehow get lost in what some folks the friday news dump. but the american people aren't easily fooled. the far left has always hated medicare advantage. it is a program that offends them ideologically because it offers more market-based choices to seniors than traditional medicare. but the left's prodding is not the only reason the obama administration has already cut the successful program so deeply and why it now plans to cut it even deeper. the hundreds of billions of dollars worth of cuts that washington democrats want to impose on medicare advantage,

cuts that will cause millions of seniors to lose doctors and face higher premiums are basically to fund obamacare. some folks might describe this as robbing peter to pay paul. but i've got a better analogy. it's like ripping off parts of a cad lick to patch up -- cadillac to patch up a pinto. american seniors understand this. our constituents like, they like the choices medicare advantage offers, and they don't like obamacare. and that's why seniors from all across kentucky have written to protest this misguided policy. jack and alva writes from fair dale wrote that medicare advantage has been there for them when they needed it, and it's tough for seniors to have to find new doctors, especially those who live in rural areas. it means traveling greater distances and spending more on gas. it's a sad thing, they wrote, when good doctors leave a plan because of funding cuts.

ronald and linda bynumb from edgewood wrote they find it appalling that money put away for senior citizens is now being used for things like obamacare. it seems like most politicians are only working for themselves instead of the people, they wrote. look, they have every right to be frustrated. i mean, why on earth would we want to ruin one program that's helping people in order to fund another that's causing them so much pain? the question answers itself. and that's why i along with senators cornyn, thune, barrasso and blunt sent a letter to the administration today to express our deep concerns with these proposed cuts to medicare advantage and other proposals that would increase premiums, reduce choices and cause america's seniors to lose access to the health plans they were promised they could keep. our letter asks the administration to act within the bound of the law to limit the negative impact these misguided

policies would have on seniors. now, it's notable that even some of our friends on the other side of the aisle seem to understand the pain that all of this is causing.that's why 19 -- 19 sene democrats recent shrined a bipartisan letter with 21 republicans that called on the administration to mitigate the impact of these cuts to medicare advantage. weigh appreciate democrat support on any issue. it's good when they acknowledge the senselessness of cutting one successful program to fund a failed one of cuts that will make it even harder for america's seniors to keep the benefits, plans, and doctors of their choice. but, frankly, it is hard to believe they're really being serious on this one. that's because nearly every one of these senators voted for obamacare, the very law that imposes the same cuts they're now railing against and nearly every single one of them voted

later to keep these quuts in place. senator hatch proposed an amendment that would have reversed obamacare's cuts to medicare advantage and it only failed because nearly every democratic senator voted against it. so washington democrats had their chance for a mulligan, and they took a pass. they actually can't have it both ways. and signing onto some letter won't absolve them of responsibility now. it won't erase the fact that even when we're given a second chance to help america's seniors, many voted a second time to take a whack at medicare. and let's not forget, these folks and their allies are basically the very same ones that promised up and down that americans could keep their health care plans that they had and they liked under obamacare, a promise that was voted "the lie of the year" in 12013. so -- in 20136789 so americans aren't about to be taken in on

the latest obamacare spin. let's be honest. the real realistic solution is to undo the damage altogether by starting over with real reform. that means replacing obamacare and its more than $700 billion in medicare cuts, cuts imposed solely to fund obamacare, and replacing that with bipartisan reforms that can actually help struggling middle-class americans. i urge the democrats to follow the lead of prominent -- of one prominent senate democrat who said just the other day he would vote tomorrow -- vote tomorrow -- to repeal obamacare. if he's serious about what he said, that means he's finally listening to the american people instead of the party bosses in washington. if more of these colleagues on the other side of the aisle would only do the same, we could finally move afford with real patient-centered health reform. we could finally do away with the practice of raiding medicare

to fund obamacare. we could doway with the hurt this is causing men and women all across the country -- college graduates, moms, dads, constituents who struggle every day to get by, and, of course, millions -- literally millions of seniors. republicans are on their side. we agree with them that obamacare is a law that just doesn't work, and we agree with them that now is not the time to impose higher costs and reduced choices for senior citizens, as the partisan obamacare law proposes. i know the authors of this law may have had good intentions, but now is the time for them to admit past mistakes and works with republicans in a bipartisan fashion to remedy these errors before even more people get hurt by obamacare. mr. president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. , oh, i withhold that. --, oh, i withhold that.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will be in a period of morning business until 11:05 a.m. with senators permitted to speak therein up to ten minutes each, with time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees with the majority controlling the first half. the senator from arkansas. mr. pryor: mr. president, thank you. i will speak in morning business here about a friend of mine and a presidential nominee to be on the federal bench in arkansas, and i'll just take three to five minutes here, mr. president, because i know i have others that want to speak. but today i rise to support the nomination of judge james moody, who in arkansas we call j. moody, to be the federal judge from the eastern district of

arkansas. jay has been a phenomenal judge and lawyer for a long time in arkansas, and one of the things that this nomination illustrates to me -- and i think also brings home to people around the country -- is that this body should not play games with the third branch of government. we have our own issues here. this body can be dysfunctional, be highly partisan. let's don't export that to the judiciary. we have a fine man who has offered his service to be a federal judge. if you look at the things that i like to look at, is he well-qualified? yes, absolutely. everyone agrees on that. can he be fair and impartial? that's what you want in a judge. the answer is, yes, he can be very fair and impartial. and he's democrat administrated that as a -- and he's demonstrated that as a member of the arkansas bench for a long time now. and also, especially in the district court position, does he have the right judicial

temperament? i think every person who's every dealt with judge jay moody will say that he not only has the right teem prarntle but h tempes and exceeds all the criteria on all of these. he is exactly the kind of judge that we should all want. there's no reason why judge moody wang confirmed back in december. he should have been. but for the wrangling here in the senate, but for the problems we've had in the senate in the last several months, he would be a federal judge today, and he should be a federal judge today. in fact, two weeks ago came to the floor, asked for consent that we go ahead and just do him by unanimous consent, but that was not granted. singsince 2003, he has seabed sa trial court judge in the little rock area. he's previously worked at the

firm of wright, lindsey, and jennings law firm, one of the most prestigious firms in the state, a very well-known law firm, highly professional, great reputation. he became a partner there in 1994, just a few years after he joined the firm. and he also spent time as a jungts professor at the university -- adjunct professor at the university of arkansas boeing school, where he also learned his j.d. nonetheless, i could spend 20 minutes talking about his qualifications, talking about what a find nominee and fine selection jay moody is to be district judge in the eastern district of arkansas. but honestly, this turns out to be a no-brainer. i am not going to belabor his qualifications and why we should do this other than 10 that i that i think -- other than to say that i think -- i know that i am tired and i think people

all over the country are tired of the gra gridlock in washingt. we look at the state like arkansas where we have eight district judges, we have two vacancies which should have been filled back in december. but now they've been working under 75% horsepower for months. we could have fixed that back in december but just because of the wrangling in the senate and in washington, that was not able to get done. but today is the day that we can recognizify that. today is the day that we can confirm judge moody to be on the federal bench. i think we can all be proud of this nomination. again, he is exactly what we would all want in a federal judge, and that is confirmed by talking to lawyers in arkansas. it doesn't matter if you are a criminal lawyer or civil lawyer, doesn't matter if you are a plaintiff's lawyer or a defense lawyer, everybody agrees that he

will be a great federal judge. and one of his old law partners, managing partner of wright, lindsey, jennings, told me one time, how is he on the bench? and he paid one of the best compliments a lawyer cannify a judge. he said, he gets his work done. do we really ask for more than that? it is uncanny when you look at the high-profile, complicated cases that mancases that that ce circuit court in little rock, almost always he is the one that ends up with the case. not only do the lawyers love him and appreciate him, but also his colleagues obviously have a lot of respect and they often hand off the more difficult cases to judge moody. in fact, i heard a conversation

here on the floor just two or three weeks ago. my colleague senator boozman of arkansas is supportive of this nominee and has been helping push this nominee through the process, went to the judiciary committee -- by the way, this nomination has not come through the judiciary once, but twice. but, anyway, senator boozman helped push him through the judiciary committee, helped to get him to the floor, has talked to his clea republican colleagu. i overheard a conversation where senator boozman was talking to senator mcconnell and said, "mitch, this guy is great." he said, you couldn't have picked -- you couldn't pick someone better had you picked him yourself. and that's really jay moody in a nutshell. i would like to ask my colleagues to vote for this nomination today. i believe we vote in just about 30 to 45 minutes.

i am not quite sure of exactly when we start. but i ask my colleagues to support this nomination. with that, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from idaho.

the senator from nebraska. mr. johanns: mr. president, thank you. i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. johanns: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, last friday we heard that the health care law is scheduled to deliver yet another blow to americans. the administration released a proposal that would significantly cut medicare advantage. medicare advantage is a very well received program. it offers private plan options for seniors on medicare. nearly 30% of medicare beneficiaries voluntarily choose to enroll in medicare advantage because it offers extra benefits. it offers lower costs, more flexibility and better care coordination than the traditional medicare program. this program, medicare advantage, has been very well received in the state of

nebraska. about 35,000 nebraskans are enrolled in medicare advantage. an analysis notes that further cuts to medicare advantage -- quote -- "would disproportionately affect beneficiaries with low incomes, including the 41% of he -- of enrollees with incomes below $20,000." now, mr. president, this announcement is absolutely no surprise. the health care law siphoned over $700 billion from medicare not to strengthen the program, but to pay for obamacare. $308 billion of those cuts come from medicare advantage. again, affecting disproportionately beneficiaries with low incomes, including 41%

who are trying to live on incomes below $20,000. the reality is these cuts will likely mean fewer benefits and higher out-of-pocket costs for seniors who can't afford that. plans could drop out of the market altogether or seniors could find out that their trusted doctor will no longer be covered by their plan. we've already started to see the consequences. since the passage of obamacare, the number of medicare advantage plans available to seniors has not been strengthened. in fact, they have been reduced from 48 in 2009 to now 20. in rural areas, seniors have fewer choices. the plans available have dropped from 36 to 13 according to a

kaiser analysis. another study estimates about 526,000 of current 2013 medicare advantage enrollees will have to make some changes because their plan is not available in 2014. now how do these consequences match up with the president's promises? well, they don't. the president spoke about medicare, and he said -- quote -- "don't worry, i'm not going to touch it." unquote. or his promise, if you like your plan you can keep it, which an independent fact checker has called the lie of the year. the medicare advantage issues unraveling today are symbolic of the broader problems with this law. the math doesn't add up and the

promises aren't kept. nearly every week now it seems the authors and supporters of this law are trying to bury their past. they're trying to create hollow promises. they're trying to get around misleading statements and hide behind a new position, at least until november elections are over. it's remarkable that they're perfectly willing to evade the key pillars of this law. the law's employer mandate has been ignored and delayed. mandated plan benefits aren't required for another year. and deadlines are conveniently rescheduled to when? until after the election. this time around 19 democrat senators have joined a number of republicans in writing the medicare administrator saying the administration's medicare advantage cuts -- quote --

"create disruption and confusion." unquote. and -- quote -- "inhibit plans from driving the innovation that has resulted in better care and improved outcomes for medicare beneficiaries." unquote. what's so contradictory is that these same individuals voted against amendments offered by senator hatch twice during the health care law debate that would have struck obamacare's medicare advantage cuts. twice voted against that. understanding the consequences of these medicare advantage cuts before the law was passed would seem like the responsible course of action. but rejecting these amendments, voting for a bill that cuts over $300 billion from medicare advantage and then backpedaling

when the politics gets tough, when the cuts become real to everyday folks is not straightforward leadership. apparently they were for the cuts before they were against the cuts. it's even more frustrating when you consider that recent efforts to dodge these cuts are only part of the story. for the past few years the obama administration has been pumping money back into medicare advantage under the guise of a so-called demonstration program, that the government accountability office says they probably don't even have the authority to run. g.a.o. asserted that h.h.s. should terminate the demonstration program, but the administration flat-out ignored that. the real purpose of the $8 billion program was to

effectively mask the health care law's significant cuts to medicare advantage until -- when? -- after the november election. it is just another example of the administration's hiding their poor decisions and then rewriting the law, as they see fit. but as this new medicare notice clearly shows, this phony demonstration project is about to run out and our senior citizens are truly caught. our taxpayers deserve a government that is held accountable for its actions. americans are tired of temporary fixes and lip service. they are rightfully demanding the truth. it's time for my friends across the aisle to own up to the devastating consequences of this law and acknowledge that it's time to repeal it.

during the debate, republicans also supported an amendment to ensure medicare savings were invested back in medicare, not used to back obamacare. remarkably, nearly everyone on that side of the aisle rejected that idea. republicans are still committed to that principle, and we stand ready to work on ensuring that the medicare program is accessible, that it is flexible, that it is cost-efficient for seniors today and for our grandchildren in the decades to come. taking money out of medicare to finance obamacare was wrong, and it needs to stop. that, mr. president, is a promise worth delivering on. thank you. i yield the floor. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. thune: cuts to medicare

advantage, cuts that were dick indicated by obamacare and will result in higher prices and fewer choices for millions of american seniors. more than 15 million seniors, close to 30% of all medicare recipients are enrolled in medicare advantage plans and the "wall street journal" reports that approximately one out of every two new medicare enrollees chooses medicare advantage. medicare advantage offers seniors the chance to pick a plan that's right for them instead of a one-size-fits-all approach. advantage plans also frequently offer important health supplements like dental, vision

and wellness benefits as well as sphaur co-pays or -- smaller co-pays or deductibles. enrollees experience better care and experience better outcomes than those enrolled in trab additional fee for service medicare. despite the benefits offered to seniors, in 2010 the president and democrats paid, or i should say tried to pay for obamacare by cutting more than $700 billion already on its way to bankruptcy to pay for a new entitlement to nonseniors. more than $300 billion of those cuts were targeted specifically at the medicare advantage program. those those cuts are kicking in this year hitting them with benefit cuts of he have to $70 a month, no small thing for a senior on fixed income.

friday's announcement of further steep cuts could mean up to an additional $75 a month in increased costs neck year. mr. president, that's not all. cost hikes are bad enough, but this year's cuts in th cuts and5 cuts will result in a host of other problems for seniors that participate in medicare advantage. first and foremost, some seniors will lose their plans entirely as a result of obamacare's cuts breaking the president's promise that if you like your plan, you can keep t the kaiser family foundation estimates that more than half a million seniors will lose their current plans in 2014. if the 2015 cut go into effects, even more seniors will lose their plans next year. seniors will also have fewer plan choices as a result of obamacare's raiding medicare advantage to pay for a new health care entitlement program. if next yier's cuts go into effect, we can expect to see

even more reductions. these higher costs rndz a ducks will disproportionately impact low-income seniors in rural areas, areas like i represent in south dakota. 41% of those k. seniors in medicare advantage plans have annual incomes of less than $20,000 and are least able to bear the higher costs forced on them by obamacare. yet it is precisely -- precisely those seniors who are bearing the greatest burden when it comes to paying for obamacare. on top of that, reports indicate that plans are responding to the cuts by reducing their footprint in rural markets giving these seniors fewer options when it comes to choosing a health plan. like so many other americans suffering under obamacare, seniors on medicare advantage plans may no longer be able to keep the doctors they have and like, thanks to these cuts. between medicare cuts and the

new obamacare tax insurance companies are facing, companies are scrambling for ways to continue to afford their plans. their own option is to narrow their networks of partisan whos and doctors or raise their deductibles increasing seniors h's health care costs. republicans have long touted the quality care and patient choice that's offered by medicare advantage plans. when the health bill was being considered in 2010, we warned at the time that medicare cuts being proposed in the bill would hurt seniors, damage medicare advantage, and weaken a program already hastening toward bankruptcy. despite this, democrats not only supported the health care bill, they also voted twice against measures to lee peel the -- to repeal the law's cuts to medicare advantage a now it seems that many democrats have changed their minds. earlier this month 19 democrat senators, most of them voted for

obamacare no 2010, joined a number of republicans in sending a letter to the administrator of the centers for medicare and medicaid services urging her not to cut medicare advantage. let's hope it's not too little too late. mr. president, democrat support for the medicare advantage letter to the c.m.s. administrator reflects their increasing unease with their support for obamacare. for once they planned to ought to obamacare as a legislative pry usm, democrats up for reduction now can't run away from the law fast enough. in fact, the president has repeatedly delayed parts of the health care law to give democrats political cover and each delay is just a tacit admission that, yes, this law will hurt jobs and the economy because, after all, if this law weren't going to hurt jobs and the economy, why do we have to continually delay it? the latest number is somewhere

in the 20's. i've heard 24, 27, 28 different delays of the effects -- the harmful effects and impacts of obamacare. if the health care law were the panacea the american people were promised, democrats and the president would be working to complement the law faster -- implement the law fast h fastert slow it dowfnlt its implementation is going to hurt. it is a little awkward when your signature legislation has to be delayed to give the folks who voted for it a better chance at keeping their jobs. unfortunately the president doesn't seem to have learned his lesson. not content with the damage his health care law is doing to an already struggling economy, a recent c.b.o. report warned the health care law may result in up to 2.5 million fewer full-time workers. he continues to push policies that will further weaken our already sluggish economy like a minimum wage bill that c.b.o.,

the congressional budget office reports would result in up to one million fewer jobs. at a time when our labor force participation rate is a jimmy carter-era lows, a law that would further reduce the number of full-time workers is one of the worst possible things we could do for our economy. mr. president, people working produces economic growth. the fewer people working, the less likely we are to produce the kind of growth we need to pull our economy out of the slump it's been in throughout the president's administration. what we need right now are policies that will create jobs and encourage businesses to expand and invest in our economy and in our workers. if the president were really serious about reversing the economic stagnation of the past five years, he wouldn't be pushing his health care bill or a minimum-wage hike. instead he would be calling the senate majority leader and urging him to take up and pass trade proegs authority which will -- promotion authority

which will kraut thousands of jobs. he would sign off on the keystone pipeline and the 42,000-plus jobs it would support. and he would join bipartisan majorities in both houses of congress to support a repeal of the job-destroying medical device tax in his health care law, a tax that has already cost more than 33,000 jobs in our economy. mr. president, american families and workers are hurting. they have been hit hard by obamacare and the obama economy. it is time for the president to give them some help. and, mr. president, i would argue that all we have to do, there are bipartisan issues out there -- trade promotion authority, repeal of the medical device tax, the keystone pipeline have broad bipartisan majorities here in the united states senate. we had a vote a year ago on the budget on repealing the medical device tax. 39 senators including 3 democrats voted for that. the last time we had a vote here on the keystone pipeline we had

62 votes in support of it, representing again broad bipartisan support for that initiative. we know that trade promotion authority is something that enjoys support from both republicans and democrats. all of these measures, all of these initiatives, mr. president, enjoy broad bipartisan support and are known job creators. those are the types of things that we ought to be focused on, not things that according to the congressional budget office are going to cost more jobs. implementation of obamacare, according to the c.b.o. from a report a couple of weeks ago, would reduce the number of workers in this country by 2.5 million over the next decade. it also said it would reduce by about 1% overall wages. so fewer jobs, lower take-home pay. and then last week we had the report coming out from the congressional budget office that raising the minimum wage could cost up to a million jobs. at the same time it is raising prices so the very people we're trying to help are going to have

fewer jobs and higher costs. how does that solve the problems that our economy faces? how does that get people in this country back to work? how does that grow and expand our economy in a way that promotes greater opportunity for -- creates greater opportunity for middle-class families? mr. president, there are things that we can do on which there is broad bipartisan support that are known job creators, that are known to expand and grow our economy. and i would add to that list as well reforming our tax code, which we have lost so much in terms of economic growth in the past few years since the recession and coming out of that recession because we've had subpar growth. we haven't seen the types of growth rates we normally see and experience coming out of a recession during a recovery. as a consequence of that, we have much larger deficits. because when the economy is growing at a sluggish, anemic, slow rate, it means that there are fewer people working, fewer people investing, fewer people making money, and, therefore,

fewer people paying taxes. we need the opposite. we need a growing, expanding, vibrant, dynamic economy fueled by policies in washington, d.c. that make it less expensive and less difficult to create jobs rather than more expensive and more difficult, which is what we see coming out of the obama administration and the democrat majority here in the united states senate. we can do better, mr. president. we must do better for the american people, for middle-class families who have been hit hard by the effects and impacts of this economy with fewer jobs, lower take-home pay, higher premiums, higher deductibles, fewer choices of doctors and hospitals under obamacare. these are the policies that are hurting the american people. we need to put policies in place that will help the american people by growing our economy and creating more jobs for middle-class americans. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive

session to consider the following nomination which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. james maxwell moody jr. of arkansas to be united states district judge for the eastern district of arkansas. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the time until 11:15 a.m. will be equally divided and controlled in the usual form. a senator: mr. president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. leahy: mr. president?

the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, i ask consent the call of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: mr. president, for almost two decades judge william sessions has served as a federal judge for the district of vermont, and last month judge sessions announced he would take senior status later this year. i've worked with senator sanders and representative well -- welch in the vermont bar association to convene a merit position to find highly qualified candidates to serve on the vermont district court so i could then recommend them to the president. i know i speak on behalf of all vermonters, no matter what their background, when i thank judge sessions for his years of distinguished public service. i applaud him for agreeing to continue his judicial service even after he takes senior status this summer. because of his continued dedication to vermont has one of the most highly respected,

capable jurists on the federal bench. i'm proud to call judge sessions my friend. i'm honored to cast my vote to confirm his nomination 18 years ago. and i ask unanimous consent to include in the "congressional record" a completion of my remarks, a recent article from the "herald" in vermont that accounts his many accomplishments. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: there are only two authorized district judgeships in vermont and so when president clinton asked for a recommendation to fill a vacancy in my state, i didn't take this task lightly. i knew the people of vermont deserved a judge with integrity, intelligence and fairness, somebody that anybody could go before, plaintiff or defendant, rich or poor, no matter what their political background, and know they would have a fair

hearing. during my time when i was in private practice as a litigant and then as a litigant and state's attorney in vermont, i experienced firsthand the traditional legal excellence we have in vermont. i know many vermont lawyers who are among the best this country has to offer. and bill sessions earned a reputation as one of the finest trial lawyers in the state. he was widely respected by prosecutors and defense lawyers and by the plaintiff and defense bars alike. he is praised by those who have been his cocounsel, by state and federal judges and prosecutors and even by those who have been his opposing counsel in court. so it was a privilege to submit his name to the white house for nomination to u.s. district court. at the time i told president clinton this would be one nomination he would never have to question his judgment in

making, because he would have somebody who would always serve the country so well. and the senate confirmed him unanimously on august 11, 1995. he received his b.a. from middlebury college in 1969 following his graduation with honors from the george washington university law school in 1972, judge sessions served this country in the u.s. army from 1972 to 1977 in active service from 1972 to 1973. he also served as a law clerk to another friend of mine, judge hilton dire of the addison county district court. before service on the federal bench judge service contributed to his community as an adjunct professor of vermont law school and private practice as the executive director of the youth services bureau and is a public defender in addison county.

he has worked tirelessly to make sure all those who come before him are treated fairly and with dignity. he has taken seriously his commitment to justice and the american people. he served for many years a member of the judicial conference composed of the leaders of the federal judiciary. he served for a decade in the united states sentencing commission, serving as chairman under three presidents both democratic and republican. in my time remaining, i just want to say he doesn't forget what it is to be a vermonter. he still finds time on weekends to be at farmers' markets around vermont. he's a familiar face at a booth for bloom ledge farm, a small vermont dairy started by his daughter hannah and his son-in-law greg. i think of a picture of him holding a grandchild in one hand

and making change for one of the customers with the other. he's one of our country's most respected jurists. he's a lawyer's lawyer and a judge's judge. my wife and i think of he and abbey, his wife, as dear personal friends. our justice system has benefited a great deal from judge session sessions' years of service. i thank judge sessions for all he's done as a federal judge. mr. president, i ask consent that my full statement be made part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: mr. president, what is the pending business? the presiding officer: the senate is currently considering the moody nomination. mr. leahy: is there a time

agreement on that? the presiding officer: all time is now expired. mr. leahy: i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the question occurs on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: is there anyone wishing to vote or to change their vote? if not, the ayes are 95, the noes are 4, the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, there will be two minutes of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees prior to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the donato nomination. the senate will be in order. who seeks recognition? mr. leahy: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. the senate will be in order.

the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, the next nominee, mr. donato, was originally nominated in june of 2013. his vote out of the judiciary -- he was voted out of the judiciary committee unanimously. the judicial emergency -- the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. please take your conversations out of the well. the senate will be in order. mr. reid: mr. president, the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, i have heard from my friends on the republican side that we should be concerned about emergency vacancies. this is an emergency vacancy. it was -- he was reported out unanimously over a year ago. had to be reported out a second time this year, again unanimously. has the strong support of the two senators from california. so holding up for him to filibuster and go through all

that on this is a kind of game playing that hurts the federal judiciary. it's almost like the efforts made by our friends on the other side in closing down the government last year. this is just a slow way to close down the federal judiciary. i would urge immediate consideration and confirmation. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: may i interrupt a question to through the chair to the distinguished senator of the judiciary committee. does the chair think we should have a recorded vote on this? mr. leahy: i would be happy to have a voice vote. the presiding officer: who yields time in opposition? without objection, the time is yielded back. the clerk will report the motion to involkmer -- invoke cloture.

the clerk: we the undersigned senators in accordance with the rules 22 of the standing rules of the senate hereby move to bring to a close the debate on the nomination of james donato of california to be united states district judge for the northern district of california, signed by 18 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of james donato of california to be united states district judge for the northern district of california shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote: the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 55, the nays 52 and one senator voted present. mr. reid: madam president? go ahead. the presiding officer: one senator responded present and the motion is agreed to. mr. reid reid: reid: madam pres? reid i have nine unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have my approval and senator mcconnell. i ask unanimous consent these requests be agreed to and printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: madam president, chairman leahy has told me that he has no need for a r